Matthew Parris has seen the Light

[gardenbird48]

Parting of the ways
Another email arrives from the Stonewall organisation. “Get involved in Rainbow Laces, Trans Day of Remembrance and our first ever Festive Reception . . .” I learn that “you can now buy laces in the ace, bi, lesbian, non-binary, pan and trans flag colours”.

I do dimly remember the reason I sat alongside a dozen or more good souls, gathered in a tacky office, to found Stonewall 31 years ago — and it wasn’t for this. Our motives had something to do with bringing people into the fold, with winning doubters over, with quiet reason, with what unites and not what divides human beings.
That’s it now, I’m afraid, with me and Stonewall. No broadcasting, no splenetic columns, no failure of respect — none — for trans, pan, non-binary, lesbian, bi, or ace (now I’ve looked it up) people. Just a quiet and rather sad walking away . . .

sorry, trying to sort out a share token....

The bit that would be really helpful is if he could speak out a bit. For evil to flourish, all it takes is for good men to say nothing (or something like that)

Saw this, hope he speaks up more/expands on this

Here's a share token:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/013f328c-2918-11eb-aca7-1c9add2102c6?shareToken=0ee106bfd47013fe94210e3153d405a7

Oh, gosh. That's pretty significant.

comments urging him not to walk away but to challenge stonewall

He has written a tiny bit before in a British understated not quite saying it properly way about TRA attitudes and victimhood. Don’t think he really gets the issues for women more the overall lack of openness of thinking with it all.

His style is typically an understated and gentle one in his writing so I am not surprised that he has approached his separation from Stonewall like this. Perhaps he’s deliberately being like this in an effort to keep some bridges unburnt for future debate with them.

There are some good comments.
Perhaps he should consider walking towards the LGB Alliance?

I love Matthew Parris. His politics are not mine but I respect his common sense approach to the world, and love his writing. Such an insightful man.

@Lumene

He has written a tiny bit before in a British understated not quite saying it properly way about TRA attitudes and victimhood. Don’t think he really gets the issues for women more the overall lack of openness of thinking with it all.

I think he may be hinting at the conflict of rights with the 'what divides people' though

Where are the labels and flags for the heterosexual spectrum? We could have one with two hearts on it for the happily married faithful with 20+ years behind them and another with crossed fingers and a computer for those devotees of OLD and everything in between. New categories could pop up at regular intervals representing, say, bigamists with secret lives or divorced people trying again.

I feel under-flagged!

I think he may be hinting at the conflict of rights with the 'what divides people' though

Possibly, though from previous writing I got the sense that he just didn’t understand at a core level why this whole area was such a big issue for women. But why would he I guess?

Bet Janice Turner has bent his ear off about this already

@Tootsweets23

I love Matthew Parris. His politics are not mine but I respect his common sense approach to the world, and love his writing. Such an insightful man.

Yes, same here. He comes across as a really decent chap.

I fact, I think it was probably through seeing Matthew parris on breakfast news years ago, and finding out he was a tory but that (shock, horror) I could still respect him and his views, and agree with quite a lot of them, that I came to have a more mature understanding of the world and politics, than us = good, them = evil.

I don't think he's seen the light or if he has he decided to say nothing. If you look at the replies to the article he has replied to a few people but ignored the numerous comments on Stonewall.

I wouldn't read too much into his statement, regarding women's rights.

He's realised that it's not the organisation he helped to set up; I imagine that for a man who experienced the homophobic discrimination of the 80s, the shoelaces for asexuality must have been hard to stomach. In the future, it seems likely he will be thinking for himself whether any particular Stonewall campaign has merit, rather than trusting them. That may see him taking a publicly GC position, but it equally may not.

I don't think he's seen the light yet, he's just got as far as starting to see the darkness.

@ErrolTheDragon

I don't think he's seen the light yet, he's just got as far as starting to see the darkness.

I'll be quoting this - very true.

That's a perfect way to put it Errol.

@ErrolTheDragon You do have an excellent turn of phrase

That's an amazing phrase, I hope I can remember (and borrow) it in future.

@ErrolTheDragon

I don't think he's seen the light yet, he's just got as far as starting to see the darkness.

I think you are right Errol.

I have a feeling I have read previous articles by him suggesting feminists should stop making such a fuss about transwomen...

But let's hope the sky is dawning.

@ErrolTheDragon

I don't think he's seen the light yet, he's just got as far as starting to see the darkness.

I think you’ve got that spot on!

That all seems a bit..cryptic? He’s leaving Stonewall over shoelaces? Well, clearly not, but he’s not really explaining his issue with the organisation either.

Good point NewlyGranny